https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90048 Small scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was not lost merely because the products and packaging referred to other manufacturers' names. The goods prominently bore the appellants' own brand name, and the references to Kirloskar and Escorts were used only to show suitability for particular engine makes or models, not as adoption of another's trade mark or trade name in a proprietary sense. On that basis, the bar on exemption for use of another manufacturer's brand name did not apply, and denial of the small scale exemption was unsustainable. en-us Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Oct 2011 11:14:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90048 Small scale exemption under Notification No. 175/86-C.E. was not lost merely because the products and packaging referred to other manufacturers' names. The goods prominently bore the appellants' own brand name, and the references to Kirloskar and Escorts were used only to show suitability for particular engine makes or models, not as adoption of another's trade mark or trade name in a proprietary sense. On that basis, the bar on exemption for use of another manufacturer's brand name did not apply, and denial of the small scale exemption was unsustainable. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 28 Oct 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=90048